In light of our discussion last class, I’ve been thinking a lot about how words that have horrific histories (like the “N” word) or words that have been demonized (like “socialism) impede constructive discussion both inside and outside of the classroom. Of course, To Kill a Mockingbird and the discourses about the work clearly demonstrate the former, and thus provides some interesting insights. As a work that forces a reader to confront the brute racism of a small, depression-era town in southern Alabama, To Kill a Mockingbird exemplifies a vital function literature serves.
Using words with horrific pasts and/or words that have been demonized (whether warranted or unwarranted) presents an awkward situation that perhaps we’ll never truly overcome. Thus, this may be where literature is most useful: readers can confront their own emotions, prejudices, etc., in their own comfort zone, and be forced to challenge these prejudices without fear of being ostracized.
Many may disagree with me, but I feel we engage in a silly game in the classroom. We often love to talk about “those racist people out there,” and of course assume that none of us in the classroom could possibly have had racist thoughts. Further, as illustrated by the recent controversies surrounding Juan Williams and Rick Sanchez, expressing ones prejudices, even when hedging their statements in Williams’ case, can have very real consequences.
Thus, it seems rather apparent that being overly candid about ones prejudices in any public situation may be less than desirable; and this is where literature serves a useful function. Through novels like To Kill a Mockingbird we can be forced to confront our prejudices without fear, and in our own comfort zone. Perhaps this may not be the best way confront and achieve a post-race attitude, but at least it’s a start.
No comments:
Post a Comment